‘Enemy Combatant’ Sham (NYTimes Editorial)

The Bush administration insists that it can hold American citizens in secret as long as it wants, without access to lawyers, simply by calling them ”enemy combatants.” … The administration’s position makes a mockery of the Constitution and puts every American’s liberty at risk. It is important that the court strike it down….

Of all the post-Sept. 11 denials of civil liberties, the enemy combatant doctrine is among the worst. It gives the president untrammeled authority to lock up Americans merely by asserting that they are part of a terrorist plot. …

The framers of the Constitution knew that if the government was allowed to act on those impulses (to detain in secret), the result would be tyranny. That is why they built into this nation’s founding document the very rights the Bush administration is intent on taking away.

Mourning in America By JOHN B. ROBERTS II, NYTimes

As a fellow Republican, I would also offer Karl Rove some friendly political advice. … With an election approaching, presenting the picture of a president who has time for fundraisers but not for military funerals would be an egregious mistake.

[T]here is an asymmetry to the administration’s use of the military in presidential events. It is wrong to bask publicly in glory on the deck of an aircraft carrier unless you are also willing to grieve openly for fallen soldiers. You can’t wrap yourself in the flag while avoiding flag-draped coffins.

Update 4-23-04

See also:

mjh’s Dump Bush weBlog: Flag-draped Coffins, I (Russ Kick)

mjh’s Dump Bush weBlog: Flag-draped Coffins, II (Tami Silicio)

colorado environmental coalition

What’s at stake

The Domenici-Tauzin energy bill spells disaster for America’s energy future and the farmers, ranchers, wildlife, recreationists, and rural residents of the West. Oil and gas provisions in the Domenici-Tauzin energy bill are a radical departure from the approach by Congress to managing our public lands in the West over the last 50 years.

The bill seeks to entrench oil and gas development as the dominant use of America’s western public and private “split estate” lands — at the expense of rural communities, wildlife, water quality, private property rights, recreationists, and family farms and ranches.

At the same time, the bill unnecessarily increases subsidies to the oil and gas industry — to the tune of billions of dollars — all the while shifting liability for clean-up of abandoned oil and gas fields from energy companies to taxpayers.

In the meantime, speeding up drilling in the West won’t make America energy independent.

Op-Ed Columnist: Swords Into Plowshares By DAVID BROOKS, NYTimes

Remember when George Bush used to say he was going to change the tone in Washington? He lied about that. He couldn’t even reach out to Jim Jeffords, a moderate in his own party. He was never going to reach out to Democrats. He is too intellectually insecure. He can’t handle people who disagree with him, so he retreats into the cocoon of the like-minded.

G.O.P. Leader Solicits Money for Charity Tied to Convention By MICHAEL SLACKMAN, NYTimes

It is an unusual charity brochure: a 13-page document, complete with pictures of fireworks and a golf course, that invites potential donors to give as much as $500,000 to spend time with Tom DeLay during the Republican convention in New York City next summer — and to have part of the money go to help abused and neglected children. …

[C]ampaign finance watchdogs say Mr. DeLay’s effort can be seen as, above all, a creative maneuver around the recently enacted law meant to limit the ability of federal officials to raise large donations known as soft money. …

[B]ecause the money collected will go into a nonprofit organization, donors get a tax break. And Mr. DeLay will never have to account publicly for who contributed, which campaign finance experts say shields those who may be trying to win favor with one of the most powerful lawmakers in Washington.

See also: mjh’s Weblog Entry – 05/27/2003: “Tom Delay: I am the federal government.”

[Speaker of the House Tom] DeLay recently revealed how he felt about rules of general applicability. When he tried smoking a cigar in a restaurant on federal property, the manager told him it violated federal law. His response, according to The Washington Post, was, “I am the federal government.”

Lands Worth Leaving Alone (NYTimes Editorial)

The conservationists have reason to worry, for what we are seeing is the unhappy confluence of two states of mind. One is the administration’s indifference to the value of wilderness — indeed, Ms. Norton has essentially renounced her authority to recommend more lands for wilderness protection. The other is the durable fantasy that the nation can deal with oil dependency and natural gas shortages if the drillers are let loose on public lands.

The net result has been a strategy of fast-tracking oil leases throughout the West, most conspicuously in areas that the Interior Department regarded as worthy of wilderness designation in the days before the Bush administration. …

Fully 88 percent of the public lands in the Rocky Mountains are [already] open for oil and gas drilling; in Wyoming, the figure is 94 percent. At issue, really, are scraps of land, places the Wilderness Society calls “too wild to drill.” Relative to the country’s overall needs, these scraps contain only trivial amounts of oil and natural gas.

Nobody expects the administration to abandon its basic doctrine that aggressive exploitation of the public domain is necessary to achieve energy independence. Yet a rebellion is slowly taking shape, not only among Mr. Bush’s usual adversaries in the conservation movement and in Congress, but also among some of his natural constituents….

Newsday.com – Poll: Rationale for War Faulty

More than half, 52 percent, said the United States has found clear evidence that ousted leader Saddam Hussein was working closely with the al-Qaida terrorist network.

U.S. authorities, however, have found little that would suggest widespread prewar links between al-Qaida and Hussein’s government.

The rest of this poll is interesting in that it indicates people believe the case against Iraq was ”faulty”, but we did the right thing invading and we have to stay. mjh